GeForce G102M vs Radeon R5 230

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 230 with GeForce G102M, including specs and performance data.

R5 230
2014
4 GB DDR3, 19 Watt
0.57
+32.6%

R5 230 outperforms G102M by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking12091247
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.062.10
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCaicosC79
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date3 April 2014 (10 years ago)8 January 2009 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores16016
Core clock speedno data450 MHz
Number of transistors370 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate5.0003.600
Floating-point processing power0.2 TFLOPS0.0352 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data48
ROPs44
TMUs88

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 1.0 x4PCI-E 1.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsN/Ano data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3GDDR2
Maximum RAM amount4 GBUp to 512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGAVGAHDMIDisplayPortSingle Link DVILVDS
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
​PowerPlay+no data
DDMA audio-no data
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1111.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.04.0
OpenGL4.42.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R5 230 0.57
+32.6%
GeForce G102M 0.43

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R5 230 221
+32.3%
GeForce G102M 167

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.57 0.43
Recency 3 April 2014 8 January 2009
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 14 Watt

R5 230 has a 32.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce G102M, on the other hand, has 35.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R5 230 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G102M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 230 is a desktop card while GeForce G102M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R5 230
Radeon R5 230
NVIDIA GeForce G102M
GeForce G102M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 241 vote

Rate Radeon R5 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 40 votes

Rate GeForce G102M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.